Delhi Court November 1973 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Ram Parshad Vs. Appellate Officer Etc.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-1973
Reported in: 1974RLR111
B.C. Misra, J.(1) Ram Parshad petitioner has filed this writ petition against the order of the Appellate Officer dated 21st April, 1964 by which he has reversed the order of the Competent Officer under the Evacuee Interest (Separation) Act 64 of 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) dated 29th February, 1964 and the Appellate Officer has finally ordered the transfer of the property in dispute to the displaced allottees, namely, Rup Narain and Ram Dass who are respectively respondents 4 and 5 in this petition. (2) The dispute between the parties relates to a two storeyed house bearing No. VII/1447 (old) and 1987 (new) Gali Mirdan Lal Kuan. Delhi. It was owned by Muslims, some of whom migrated to Pakistan, and 731/21/1 pies in a rupee was the evacuee's share while the remaining 1181/20/1 pies in a rupee belonged to the non-evacuees who are respondents or legal representatives of respondents Nos. 6, 7, 8 and 9 in the present writ petition. It appears that the petitioner Ram Parshad wa...
Pooran Mal and Sons and anr. Vs. Director of Inspection (investigation ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-1973
Reported in: [1974]95ITR1(Delhi)
Ansari, J. 1. By this petition under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, M/s. Pooran Mal & Sons, petitioner No. 1, and Shri Gopal Das, claiming to be a partner of petitioner No. 1 firm, challenge the validity of the proceedings under Sub-sections (3) and (5) of Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), and the order of the Income-tax Officer dated June 5, 1972, under Section 132(5) of the said Act and pray for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to restore to the petitioners the 114 silver bars retained by the Income-tax Officer by his said order dated June 5, 1972.2. The facts which give rise to this writ petition may be briefly stated. In pursuance of an authorisation issued by the Director of Inspection (Investigation), New Delhi, under Section 132(1) of the Act, searches were carried out on October 15, 1971, at the following places, namely :--1. Residence of Shri Pooran Mal, 12-K, Kamala Nagar, New Delhi-7, 2....
G.S. Nayyar Vs. Kaushalya Rani and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-28-1973
Reported in: 10(1974)DLT131; 1974RLR511
B.C. Misra, J.(1) In this case an interesting question of law has been raised by the respondents by an application (C.M. 508 of 1973) and it has been contended that the appeal filed by the opposite party and registered as R.F.A. 178 of 1970 be treated as a first appeal from order instead of an appeal from a decree with necessary consequences of dispensing with the printing of the record and its hearing by a Single Judge of the Court.(2) The legal proceedings were initiated by the respondent Smt. Kaushalya Rani in the Court of the District Judge, Delhi by a petition under section 272/278 of the Indian Succession Act 39 of 1925 praying for grant of letters of administration with a copy of the will annexed in respect of the estate of the deceased Shri Ram Rakha MalNayyar, her father, who died at Delhi on 1st October, 1964 after having executed a will dated 3rd February, 1964 registered on 17th February, 1964. The petition was contested by Shri G. S. Nayyar, appellant, son of the deceased....
Peershotam Dass Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-28-1973
Reported in: 1975CriLJ309
Pritam Singh Safeer, J.1. The appellant was tried for the offences covered by Sections 259 and 263-A of the Indian Penal Code by Shri D. C. Aggarwal, Addl. Session Judge, Delhi who found him guilty and convicted him under both the provisions. For the offence covered by Section 259 the appellant was sentenced to rigorous Imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment whereof he was to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for four months and for the offence under Section 263-A of the Indian Penal Code he was sentenced to pay a fine of Bs. 200/-. in default whereof he was to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months.2. According to the prosecution P.W. 13 Sadhu Ram an Inspector of Police in the Crime Branch received information on the 27th of March, 1970 from one Babu Ram Sharma which was reduced to the statement Ex. P.W. 13/A in which disclosure was that forged postcards were being produced and used. In order to discover the crime P.W. 13 started s...
Union of India Vs. Hukam Chand Shyam Lal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-1973
Reported in: 10(1974)DLT163
V.S. Deshpande, J.(1) TWENTY-TWO writ petitions were filed against orders disconnecting telephones of these petitioners under rule 422 of the Indian Telegraph Rules,1951,framed under section 7 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1895. Jagjit Singh,J. allowed all the writ petitions and quashed the orders of disconnection of the telephones on a construction of rules 421 and 422 which read as follows:- 'RULE 421 Where the Divisional Engineer is satisfied for reasons to be recorded in writing that it is necessary to do so, he may, after giving the subscriber a notice in writing for aperiod which shall not except in emergent cases be less than 7 days, disconnect the telephone, and in such case, the subscriber shall be entitled for refund of rent for the unexpired portion of the period for which the connection or service was given. , Rule,422 the Divisional Engineer may, in the event of any emergency, disconnect any subscriber with or without notice. In case such disconnection exceeds a period of s...
State (Delhi Administration) Vs. G.P. Nayyar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-1973
Reported in: 1974CriLJ1363
V.S. Deshpande, J.1. Olive Rona titled his book 'Law as Fact' to emphasise that law existed in the consciousness of the people and their law abidingness and that it is not merely dependent on legislative fiat. On the other hand, the omnipotence of Parliament is stressed by De Lolme by saying that by legislation it can do anything except perhaps to make a woman a man and a man a woman. While law cannot change a fact in the physical world, it can do so in the world of law by a legal fiction. The legal fiction we are concerned here is the effect of the repeal of a statute. Chief Justice Tindal in Kay v. Goodwin (1830) 130 ER 403 : 6 Bing. 576, trenchantly stated the effect of repeal as follows:I take the effect of repealing a statute to be, to obliterate it as completely from the records of Parliament as if it had never been passed, and it must be considered as a law that never existed except for the purpose of those actions which were commenced, prosecuted and concluded whilst it was an ...
Prem Das Chela Vs. Piarey Lal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-26-1973
Reported in: 1974RLR301
P.S. Safeer, J. (1) There is no scope in Article 227 of the Constitution of India for interfering with an order passed by the 'Controller' who is a creature of section 35(1) of Act 59 of 1958, He exercises the powers contained in the civil Procedure code in terms of the jurisdiction furnished by sections 25, 37 (2) and 42 of the said Act as well as rule 23 framed under Act, In all circumstances he is the 'controller' under the Act and his orders subject to section 43 thereof become final. Where his order is non-appealable the grievance can be raised in the appeal provided for by section 38 of the Act. (2) In this case in paras 16 and 18 (b) in the application, dated the 4th of October. 1969 it was mentioned that premises in part had been sub let to Badlu Ram. There was no justification for moving the application dated the 10th of August, 1973 so late impleading him as a party. (3) The petition is meritless and is dismissed in limini. ...
S. Manmohan Singh and ors. Vs. S. Balbir Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-26-1973
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi427
Rajindar Sachar, J. (1) This is a petition under section 397 to 402, sections 539 to 544 read with Schedule Ii and Section 406 of the Indian Companies Act, (hereinafter called the Act) and Section 53 of the Transfer of Property Act. Respondent No. 6 is Northern India Goods Transport Company (P) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as company). The authorised capital of the company is Rs. 5 lakhs divided into shares. The petitioners hold 19346 fully paid up shares of Rs- 10.00 each- The petitioner thus hold more than 1/10th of the issued share capital of the company and are competent to file the application under sections 397/399. The company was formed with the object of transporting goods and to carry passengers from place to place by motor lorries etc. It is alleged that the management of the company did not prepare and publish balance sheet tot the years and periods 31st October, 1966 onwards and it has also been alleged that some of the records of the company had been fabricated by the th...
Ved Prakash Malhotra Vs. State Bank of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-26-1973
Reported in: ILR1974Delhi660
V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) The petitioner is Shri Ved Parkash Malhotra who was the Chief Cashier, State Bank of India, New Delhi, on 24th May 1971 and whose credulousness in taking out the astronomical sum of sixty lakhs of rupees and in handing over the same to an unknown person hit the headlines in the Press, supplied ammunition to the critics of the Government and rocked the public. Malhotra says that the times were abnormal, he was working under great pressure and he was a victim of a clever ruse. Fortunately, however, most of the money was recovered soon and the remainder was paid into the treasury of the Bank by Malhotra himself so that the Bank did not suffer any monetary loss. The conduct of Malhotra, however, scandalised the Bank. A departmental inquiry was held against him which resulted in his dismissal on 10th November 1972 in accordance with a resolution of the Executive Committee of the Central Board of the Bank passed atits meeting on that day. (2) The petitioner has challen...
Delhi Wokf Board Vs. Shrafat Husain
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-26-1973
Reported in: 1974RLR85
H.L. Anand, J.(1) The questions that this petition U/S 115 of Civil Procedure Code . raises is as to the correct interpretation and true construction of the provisions of Sections 57 and 59 of the Wakf Act, 1954, as to the right of the petitioner to be impleded in the proceedings out of which the impugned order has arisen and to have the decree sought to be executed declared void. The petition has been filed in the following circumstances : (2) It appears that a chhajja bearing municipal No 2393, situated in gali Imliwali, Phatak Habash Khan, Delhi is surrounded on the one side by property bearing municipal No. 2397 and 2398 and on the other by a mosque which is apparently a wakf property, while one door of the chhajja opens in the mosque the other abuts on a public street, although respondent No. 1 who had admittedly purchased property bearing municipal No. 2397 and 2398 after the same had been declared as an evacuee property and had been sold by auction by the Rehabilitation Departme...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »